1. Field of Invention
This invention relates to filtration systems, specifically an air driven system with surge, media filtration, algae filtration, and no moving parts other than an air pump and the ability to re-use pressurized air.
2. Discussion of Prior Art
Prior Art, (U.S. Pat. No. 3,768,200 to Klock) shows an outlet chamber to accept filtered liquid before it is either re-circulated or discharged. The separation chamber of the present invention is constructed to allow gravity to separate the pressurized water from the pressurized air, and then push the de-gassed water up to the isolation chamber, and the pressurized air to be captured. Klock has no such mechanism.
Klock shows conservation of carbon dioxide that is produced in his bacterial growth chamber to be used as an aid in algae growth. He states that the carbon dioxide can be introduced to his air lift or allowed to issue into a plastic dome that covers the algae. Klock shows no means to capture pressurized air to be used again, as does the present invention.
Klock's design shows all of the liquid flowing through filter media. The present invention shows media cartridges positioned in a highly turbulent area where, by design, the media cartridges are bathed in the water air mixture.
Klock has no diverter as shown in the present invention.
In Klock's invention, the water is not de-gassed before entering the filtration media. The divider in the present invention is constructed to separate the pressurized air from the water, allowing the pressurized air to be used again, and the de-gassed water to be isolated in the isolation chamber.
Prior art, (U.S. Pat. No. 5,647,983 to Limcaco and U.S. Pat. No. 6,837,991 to Norris) show a rotating algae drum. Many creatures commonly kept in reef aquaria, such as jaw fish, gobies, clown fish and many others disturb and disburse sand. With the water movement and surge necessary to keep a reef aquarium, these particles of sand are often introduced into the filtration system. Any moving parts therein, such as the rotating drum shown in these patents, can and do suffer excessive wear due to the abrasive nature of sand.
Prior Art, (U.S. Pat. No. 5,647,983 to Limcaco and U.S. Pat. No. 6,837,991 to Norris) show algae bathed in water that has not been de-gassed. This necessitates a splash guard over the algae to protect the lights. The resulting buildup of calcium carbonate and algae on the underside of the splash guard inhibit light penetration and adds the chore of cleaning the splash guard. This greatly increases the wattage necessary to illuminate the algae. Reef aquariums have typically been expensive to operate in terms of energy, keeping many people out of the hobby.
Prior art, (U.S. Pat. No. 6,808,624 to Norris) shows carbon filtration in an air driven system. Although the system provides effective carbon filtration, it incorporates a rotating drum that is prone to excessive wear due to the abrasive nature of sand.
Prior Art, (U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,647,983 and 5,755,961 to Limcaco) show a rotating algae drum that alternately submerge the algae in water, and then expose the algae to air. While this did provide a surge effect for the algae, if the algae drum ever stopped due to mechanical failure, power outage, etc., the algae on the part of the algae drum exposed to air would die. Again, the abrasive nature of sand is an issue with the system.
The media cartridge of the present invention is an entirely different design than what Limcaco teaches. Limcaco shows biological filtration inside a rotating drum. The present invention shows media cartridges in a fixed position.
Prior art, (U.S. Pat. No. 6,073,585 to Horvath) is not a water filtration system; rather it is a decorative device. Horvath has a sloping partitioning wall that is constructed to maintain a constant water level. The present invention is constructed to operate with a variable water level.
Horvath shows no diverter as shown in the present invention.
Horvath's sand fountain was not built to re-use pressurized air, nor could it reasonably be made to do so due to size constraints.
Horvath's decorative sand fountain does not show any type of media filtration as does the present invention.
Horvath's decorative sand fountain does not show an isolation chamber. Further, Horvath's invention must be submerged underwater, while my invention must not be submerged underwater.